SynthesisArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2026
A scoping review of COVID-19 modelling studies in Belgium 2020-2024: incorporation of behaviour and lessons learned.
Synthesis in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic underscored the importance of integrating human behaviour in infectious disease modelling approaches, yet an in-depth assessment of how behavioural components are incorporated remains limited. We conducted a scoping review of COVID-19 models applied to Belgian data to examine how behavioural dynamics, both voluntary and policy-driven, were represented within model structures. Our aim was to identify current practices, highlight methodological gaps, and provide recommendations for the development of behaviourally integrated epidemiological models.
methodsUsing Scopus and PubMed, we identified 98 studies published between March 2020 and October 2024, describing 105 models in total. Models were classified by model class (mathematical, statistical, or ensemble), objectives, approaches used to incorporate behavioural factors, and types of behaviour data employed.
resultsBehavioural integration was confined to specific modelling contexts, with only half of the 105 models incorporating behavioural components. Mechanistic models, particularly compartmental models, were the most likely to include behavioural features, especially in studies assessing non-pharmaceutical interventions or conducting long-term forecasts and scenario analyses. Behavioural change was most commonly represented through modifications to transmission parameters or contact matrices. These adjustments were frequently informed by social contact surveys or mobility data derived from various sources.
conclusionsIn contrast to previous reviews that focused exclusively on behavioural models, this study evaluates the full landscape of Belgian COVID-19 models, offering a comprehensive perspective on how behavioural representation varies across modelling approaches. Our findings recommend that effective behavioural integration relies on timely, routine, and disaggregated surveillance and behaviour data, alongside the use of flexible mechanistic models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.